Tinto Talks #42 - 18th of December 2024

[Rasileus]

The 3D model and UI looks really ugly...

 

[Freshplayer]

Yuan dynasty wasnt that much unstable from the start game too, as they are super strong in start date 1337, and one of the main causes of Red turban rebellions were natural disasters occured one after another which created many unrest and made the folk believe Mongol rule caused that,

But it is still gonna occur every game as this is one of the crucial railroading stıff required to build a familiar and believable world it doesnt always havw to yuan losing against rebels but is should be likely for them to collapse and retreat to north and note that red turban situation should always fire


Same for Byzantines, post Late Byzantine empire succession system was kinda always troublesome , and civil wars wasnt surprising and the effects of civil war are crucial for familiar worldbuilding aspect for me as it will allow Ottomans to cross Europe and Serbia to get to northern Greece, and it is only 4 years away from start date as Byzentine ruler died pretty early, so this is a crucial aspect for railroading some aspects of history ,

Byzantine player should be more focused on getting over the civil war with least cataatrophic result and maybe try to retake their territory later on, but completely avoiding entire disaster is lame lol, if start date was a bit early then yes but it is 1337 lol, devs shouldnt make any disaster content for other nations too if Byzantines can simply avoid its startdate disaster by simply stabiltiy clicks xD

This is a typical understanding of the Mandate of Heaven under an existing stereotype emphasizing natural disasters and a cultural appropriation of Confucianism. As I argued, neo-Confucianism scholars did not believe natural disasters caused the fall of the Yuan. Instead, they believe the Yuan has lost popularity among Chinese people because of their tyranny against Confucianism principles.

The claim that "Yuan dynasty wasn't that unstable from the start of the game" is another illusion under a typical framework. Yuan was suffering from a succession of political turmoil from the very beginning.

Year	Revolt	Region
1310	Bai-Yi Chiefdoms	Yunnan
1312	Ashierhai revolted in Cangzhou	Beizhili & Henan
1315	Cai Wujiu Anti-Tax Revolt	Jiangxi
1318	Liu Jingzhou Anti-Tax Revolt	Jiangxi
1318	Lingbei Mongol Mutiny	Mongolia
1319	Mongol Army Mutiny under Yesün Temür	Ordos
1321	Buddhist-Daoist-led Revolt	Shaanxi
1323	Huziluo Tusi Revolt	Yunnan
1325	White Lotus-Buddhist Revolt	Henan
1325	Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1333	Yao/Mien Revolt	Hunan
1334	Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1337	Zhu Guangqing Revolt	Guangdong
1337	Chen Runer White Lotus Revolt	Henan
1337	Han Fashi Revolt	Sichuan
1338	Peng-Zhou White Lotus Revolt	Jiangxi
1338	Fan Mengduan Revolt	Henan
1341	Jiang-He Yao/Mien Revolt in Daozhou	Hunan
1341	Saili Tai Revolt in Cheli	Yunnan
1341	Yannan Revolts	Shandong
1342	Mo Ba Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1342	Dadu/Khanbaliq Revolt	Dadu
1343	Mozhe Yeren Jurchen Revolt	Manchuria
1343	Luri Revolt	Shanxi
1343	Revolt in Shangpeng	Sichuan
1343	Shandong revolters' Siege of Yanzhou	Shandong
1343	Jiang Bing siege of Lianzhou and Guizhou	Guangxi
1344	Guo Huonichi Revolt of Salt Merchants	Shandong
1346	Jurchen Revolts	Liaoyang
1347	Shandong Revolt expanded to the Yangtze Basin and Dadu-adjacent areas. The government lost control over the revolts.	Shandong, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui, Jiangsu, Beizhili
1347	Tangut Revolts and Siege of Huozhou	Gansu, Turpan
1347	Baarin Mongols Revolt; Yuan lost contact with Lingbei	Mongolia
1348	Jin-loyalist Jurchen Revolt	Liaoyang
1348	Tibet Revolt	Tibet
1348	Fujian Revolt	Fujian
1348	Suyang Revolt	Jiangsu
1348	Zhuang Revolts	Guangxi
1348	Yao/Mien Siege of Yuanzhou	Hunan
1348	Fan Guozhen Revolt	Zhejiang
1349	Pingyao Revolt	Shanxi
1349	Yao/Mien Siege of Daozhou	Hunan
1350	Nanyang, Anfeng Revolt	Henan
1351	White Lotus Revolt (Red Turban Revolt)	Anhui

The revolters included not only Han Chinese but also Jurchens, Tanguts, Yao/Miens, and even Mongols. Ever since 1325, White Lotus had launched more than one revolt before the finally successful Red Turban Revolt. Han Chinese, Zhuang, Tujia, Miao/Hmong also assisted in the longlasting Yao/Mien revolts. The situation worsened enough when Yuan army failed to step down Henan and Shandong revolts, leaving them expanding to the Yellow River basin and even Khanbaliq.

The imperial finance had been a disaster even before the 14th century. Its currency was basically anchorless paper money (or banknotes) without promising the free exchange of silver or gold. Yuan was in a dilemma, where more taxes were collected to control revolts while more revolts were caused by higher taxes. The huge fiscal deficit (deficit-to-GDP ratio: 22.16% in 1291, over 50% in 1307, and over 449.64% in 1311) led the Yuan government to issue excessive paper money. Between 1346 and 1355, the compound inflation rate was 12.7%, which means the currency value halved and the price doubled every five years. People won't survive in such an economy, eve without any disaster. In 1350, merchants in Khanbaliq lifted the price tenfold overnight upon the news that Chancellor Toqto'a prepared to issue a new currency. By 1368, the papers had become purely worthless papers, while towns and cities were resorting to a barter economy. As a song of Yuan Dynasty wrote, "How great is our Great Yuan, where treacherous officials monopolize power! The engineering of the Yellow River and the issuance of new paper money are the roots of disaster, inciting countless Red Turbans. Laws are abused, punishments are severe, and the common people lament. People eat people; money buys money—when has such been seen? Thieves become officials; officials act as thieves; the wise and the foolish are blurred. Alas, what a pity! 堂堂大元，奸佞专权。开河变钞祸根源，惹红巾万千。官法滥，刑法重，黎民怨。人吃人，钞买钞，何曾见。贼做官，官做贼，混愚贤。哀哉可怜！"

Apart from local instability, the central government of Yuan was also in turmoil. Külüg Khan (4yrs), Buyantu Khan (9yrs), Gegeen Khan(3yrs), Yesün Temür(5yrs), and Ragibagh Khan(1ms), Jayaatu Khan(first time; 5ms), Khutughtu Khan(first time; 8ms), Jayaatu Khan(second time; 3yrs), Rinchinbal Khan (2ms) were short-lived under intensive court conflicts. During the early regime of Ukhaghatu Khan (1333-1340, also the beginning of the game), the chancellor Bayan of the Merkid took the powers and left Khan as his puppet. Bayan was extremely racist against the Chinese and attempted to Mongolize China with a series of racist policies. Bayan forbade the Chinese from holding Iron-made weapons, including axes, hoes, plows, iron rulers, and iron walking sticks. He abolished the Imperial examination system for Confucians and prevented Chinese from entering high-ranking positions. Additionally, he banned Chinese from learning Mongol and foreign languages. To quench the frequent Chinese revolts and reduce the Chinese population in the Empire, Bayan proposed a plan to exterminate Chinese with the surnames Zhang, Wang, Liu, Li, and Zhao, which occupied 7.07%, 7.10%, 5.34%, 7.94%, and 2.29% (total 29.74%) of the modern population of China. The Khan and Bayan's nephew and successor, Toqto'a, were both worried that Bayan's policy would ignite the revolts of discontent and massive Chinese, and it did.

In summary, Yuan's regime was neither stable nor popular, even among Mongols, many of whom complained that Yuan was too Sinicized. Powerful and arrogant Mongol aristocrats against subordinated Chinese and any Sinicization reform, frequent conflicts in and out of the courts, and worsening finance had determined the fate of the empire before the final nail in the coffin.

 

[Ispil]

I don't know whether or not this would qualify as a disaster (or whether it's even remotely plausible), but it'd be kinda delightful to see some attempt to capture the time that Montenegro wound up with an imposter of Peter the Third ruling their lands.

The circumstances are a bit difficult to make generic, but I do kinda love this bit of history.

 

[Monty is staring at me]

I think professor Frost that specializes in PLC would disagree with you, if i remember correctly.

Don't know his work in particular, how would it disagree with what I am writing? Can you provide examples?

I see that he's authored a book on PLC history called The Oxford History of Poland Lithuania. It's quite an expensive book, and I don't have access to it currently, but the blurb/description of Volume I ( The Making of the Polish-Lithuanian Union, 1385-1569) fits well with what I've said:

"The Making of the Polish-Lithuanian Union 1385-1569 tells the story of the formation of a consensual, decentralised, multinational, and religiously plural state built from below as much as above, that was founded by peaceful negotiation, not war and conquest. From its inception in 1385-6, a vision of political union was developed that proved attractive to Poles, Lithuanians, Ruthenians, and Germans, a union which was extended to include Prussia in the 1450s and Livonia in the 1560s. Despite the often bitter disagreements over the nature of the union, these were nevertheless overcome by a republican vision of a union of peoples in one political community of citizens under an elected monarch. Robert Frost challenges interpretations of the union informed by the idea that the emergence of the sovereign nation state represents the essence of political modernity, and presents the Polish-Lithuanian union as a case study of a composite state."

This is essentially my point, that EU4 falsely represented the Polish elective monarchy as being less evolved than centralized nation-states, and that it was set up as a dysfunctional playground for the nobility, instead of what it actually was, which was arguably the most successful multicultural consensus-driven federal state in Europe during the game's time frame.

 

[AHumpierRogue]

This is a typical understanding of the Mandate of Heaven under an existing stereotype emphasizing natural disasters and a cultural appropriation of Confucianism. As I argued, neo-Confucianism scholars did not believe natural disasters caused the fall of the Yuan. Instead, they believe the Yuan has lost popularity among Chinese people because of their tyranny against Confucianism principles.

The claim that "Yuan dynasty wasn't that unstable from the start of the game" is another illusion under a typical framework. Yuan was suffering from a succession of political turmoil from the very beginning.

Year	Revolt	Region
1310	Bai-Yi Chiefdoms	Yunnan
1312	Ashierhai revolted in Cangzhou	Beizhili & Henan
1315	Cai Wujiu Anti-Tax Revolt	Jiangxi
1318	Liu Jingzhou Anti-Tax Revolt	Jiangxi
1318	Lingbei Mongol Mutiny	Mongolia
1319	Mongol Army Mutiny under Yesün Temür	Ordos
1321	Buddhist-Daoist-led Revolt	Shaanxi
1323	Huziluo Tusi Revolt	Yunnan
1325	White Lotus-Buddhist Revolt	Henan
1325	Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1333	Yao/Mien Revolt	Hunan
1334	Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1337	Zhu Guangqing Revolt	Guangdong
1337	Chen Runer White Lotus Revolt	Henan
1337	Han Fashi Revolt	Sichuan
1338	Peng-Zhou White Lotus Revolt	Jiangxi
1338	Fan Mengduan Revolt	Henan
1341	Jiang-He Yao/Mien Revolt in Daozhou	Hunan
1341	Saili Tai Revolt in Cheli	Yunnan
1341	Yannan Revolts	Shandong
1342	Mo Ba Yao/Mien Revolt	Guangxi
1342	Dadu/Khanbaliq Revolt	Dadu
1343	Mozhe Yeren Jurchen Revolt	Manchuria
1343	Luri Revolt	Shanxi
1343	Revolt in Shangpeng	Sichuan
1343	Shandong revolters' Siege of Yanzhou	Shandong
1343	Jiang Bing siege of Lianzhou and Guizhou	Guangxi
1344	Guo Huonichi Revolt of Salt Merchants	Shandong
1346	Jurchen Revolts	Liaoyang
1347	Shandong Revolt expanded to the Yangtze Basin and Dadu-adjacent areas. The government lost control over the revolts.	Shandong, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui, Jiangsu, Beizhili
1347	Tangut Revolts and Siege of Huozhou	Gansu, Turpan
1347	Baarin Mongols Revolt; Yuan lost contact with Lingbei	Mongolia
1348	Jin-loyalist Jurchen Revolt	Liaoyang
1348	Tibet Revolt	Tibet
1348	Fujian Revolt	Fujian
1348	Suyang Revolt	Jiangsu
1348	Zhuang Revolts	Guangxi
1348	Yao/Mien Siege of Yuanzhou	Hunan
1348	Fan Guozhen Revolt	Zhejiang
1349	Pingyao Revolt	Shanxi
1349	Yao/Mien Siege of Daozhou	Hunan
1350	Nanyang, Anfeng Revolt	Henan
1351	White Lotus Revolt (Red Turban Revolt)	Anhui

The revolters included not only Han Chinese but also Jurchens, Tanguts, Yao/Miens, and even Mongols. Ever since 1325, White Lotus had launched more than one revolt before the finally successful Red Turban Revolt. The situation worsened enough when Yuan army failed to step down Henan and Shandong revolts, leaving them expanding to the Yellow River basin and even Khanbaliq.

The imperial finance had been a disaster even before the 14th century. Its currency was basically anchorless paper money (or banknotes) without promising the free exchange of silver or gold. The huge fiscal deficit (deficit-to-GDP ratio: 22.16% in 1291, over 50% in 1307, and over 449.64% in 1311) led the Yuan government to issue excessive paper money. Between 1346 and 1355, the compound inflation rate was estimated at 12.7%. By 1368, the papers had become purely worthless papers, while towns and cities were resorting to a barter economy.

Apart from local instability, the central government of Yuan was also in turmoil. Külüg Khan (4yrs), Buyantu Khan (9yrs), Gegeen Khan(3yrs), Yesün Temür(5yrs), and Ragibagh Khan(1ms), Jayaatu Khan(first time; 5ms), Khutughtu Khan(first time; 8ms), Jayaatu Khan(second time; 3yrs), Rinchinbal Khan (2ms) were short-lived under intensive court conflicts. During the early regime of Ukhaghatu Khan (1333-1340, also the beginning of the game), the chancellor Bayan of the Merkid took the powers and left Khan as his puppet. Bayan was extremely racist against the Chinese and attempted to Mongolize China with a series of racist policies. Bayan forbade the Chinese from holding Iron-made weapons, including axes, hoes, plows for farming, iron rulers, and iron walking sticks for everyday use. While the Imperial examination system was abolished for Chinese Confucians, the Chinese were also forbidden from attaining higher rank positions and learning Mongol and foreign languages. Bayan even proposed to kill Chinese with surnames Zhang, Wang, Liu, Li, and Zhao, which occupied 7.07%, 7.10%, 5.34%, 7.94%, and 2.29% (total 22.64%) of the modern population of China. The Khan and his nephew and successor, Toqto'a, were both worried that his policy would ignite the revolts of discontent and massive Chinese, and it did.

In summary, Yuan's regime was neither stable nor popular, even among Mongols, many of who believed that Yuan was too Sinicized.

Yeah this is a major thing. I really hope that Paradox is able to sell that from the very beginning of the game, Yuan is basically already in a state of chaos. It should have the cards beyond stacked against it. Active revolts, a weak Emperor, a massively powerful noble estate(assuming Nobles will represent the Mongol nobility as Yuan), etc. Obviously we know the situation will be a thing and ought to direct things, but Yuan should be an insane challenge to overcome(and, frankly, should be designed so as to almost not be able to be overcome at all, without the cheesiest of cheese).

 

[Cry_Havok]

Can C&C

Yeah this is a major thing. I really hope that Paradox is able to sell that from the very beginning of the game, Yuan is basically already in a state of chaos. It should have the cards beyond stacked against it. Active revolts, a weak Emperor, a massively powerful noble estate(assuming Nobles will represent the Mongol nobility as Yuan), etc. Obviously we know the situation will be a thing and ought to direct things, but Yuan should be an insane challenge to overcome(and, frankly, should be designed so as to almost not be able to be overcome at all, without the cheesiest of cheese).

Since this is a game with the benefit of knowing how Yuan failed I don't necessarily think it should be impossible, but definitely hard ad come with a lot of pain and difficulty. And in the end you'd just be left with a weaker Ming, since your power base would still be in the less rich and developed regions. Yuan above all will be a sign of if the internal management is engaging and works. Can you save Yuan? Is it fun? And if you do is it overpowered, or does the really tenuous internal management persist putting a leash on external ambitions until you would not be completely OP and able to steamroll the rest of the world.

 

[Mezirsha]

Not sure whether it has been named already, but the Dutch rampjaar (disaster year) could be a disaster. It involved several invasions (of separate wars, if I recall correctly), a mob lynching the 'prime minister', probably eating parts of them too, and a change of power structure (orangists vs statists). A comparable coup-like event happened before too, when another grand pensionary got locked up, but it seems to be considered a bit less disastrous. Neither was quite a civil war, but both were quite impactful.

Also the abolition of slavery might be a situation for some countries, though some of it happened after the game's time frame.

Lastly, only half-related, but I am really interested to see how you are going to model revolutions, despite most of us possibly not playing for long enough to get there

 

[eqez]

Don't know his work in particular, how would it disagree with what I am writing? Can you provide examples?

I see that he's authored a book on PLC history called The Oxford History of Poland Lithuania. It's quite an expensive book, and I don't have access to it currently, but the blurb/description of Volume I ( The Making of the Polish-Lithuanian Union, 1385-1569) fits well with what I've said:

"The Making of the Polish-Lithuanian Union 1385-1569 tells the story of the formation of a consensual, decentralised, multinational, and religiously plural state built from below as much as above, that was founded by peaceful negotiation, not war and conquest. From its inception in 1385-6, a vision of political union was developed that proved attractive to Poles, Lithuanians, Ruthenians, and Germans, a union which was extended to include Prussia in the 1450s and Livonia in the 1560s. Despite the often bitter disagreements over the nature of the union, these were nevertheless overcome by a republican vision of a union of peoples in one political community of citizens under an elected monarch. Robert Frost challenges interpretations of the union informed by the idea that the emergence of the sovereign nation state represents the essence of political modernity, and presents the Polish-Lithuanian union as a case study of a composite state."

This is essentially my point, that EU4 falsely represented the Polish elective monarchy as being less evolved than centralized nation-states, and that it was set up as a dysfunctional playground for the nobility, instead of what it actually was, which was arguably the most successful multicultural consensus-driven federal state in Europe during the game's time frame.

Sorry, i was thinking of the period post 30 years war and your quote "Poland's political system only really started failing from the 1650s onwards, due to devastating wars, collapse of the economy, rise of sectarian violence and religious intolerance, etc. etc."

If i recall correctly from this podcast it was the Polish government inability to transform into a fiscal-military state which made it decline, which has many reasons ofcourse, but not the reasons you stated.

 

[Oglesby]

It's almost as if Situation is better.

Or if they want a different name for single country and a more wide spread issue I would say crisis and situation.

I don't know about others, but disaster has a certain connotation to it that doesn't seem to fit the mechanics

 

[Raven100]

Raja Ganesha - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How about Raja Ganesha event in Bengal where we can choose to play as Hindu rulers and making it more flavourful rather than just playing as Sunni rulers

 

[SAmaster]

Yeah this is a major thing. I really hope that Paradox is able to sell that from the very beginning of the game, Yuan is basically already in a state of chaos. It should have the cards beyond stacked against it. Active revolts, a weak Emperor, a massively powerful noble estate(assuming Nobles will represent the Mongol nobility as Yuan), etc. Obviously we know the situation will be a thing and ought to direct things, but Yuan should be an insane challenge to overcome(and, frankly, should be designed so as to almost not be able to be overcome at all, without the cheesiest of cheese).

Personally I want the ability to play a state that can collapse but reform. The start date does seem primed with the Yuan, and Delhi Sultanate, and to an extent Byzantium that they want to be able to model large states collapsing. But I think it could be fun to ride out a collapse but then go back in and retake all the lands.

 

[BeyondExpectation]

Is there any reason the Time of Troubles disaster shouldn't be available to any powerfully centralized autocratic monarchy when they have a low stat (or whatever the equivalent is) ruler die without anything approaching a strong heir?

 

[Testerian2]

Tinto Talks #42 - 18th of December 2025​

Hi! Johan is feeling under the weather today, so @SaintDaveUK and I will reply instead of him this afternoon.

He may be someday else...

 

[Nozuki]

Civil war need to be actual civil war ike in Anbennar and some other mods, not just stacks of rebels but real countries shattered in two! That would be so much more fun

And then of course the French Revolution need to be a disaster (or situation?) and not just one event asking you what you want to do

 

[Lude_has_come]

Will the constant meddling of foreign powers in Wallachia and Moldova and the instability that ensues be represented using the disaster or situation mechanics? Or other mechanics for that matter? I feel like their status as buffer states with shifting loyalties is a pretty big deal for them and the powers around, like at times there were multiple Voivodes a year coming to power and then dying or being exiled. There is potential for some rather intersting interactions and mechanics if it is done correctly.

 

[Cry_Havok]

Crown Power is a separate thing, the power of the Crown Estate, equivalent to Clergy Power and Nobility Power for example.

And even though I agree that State Power is more neutral, I can't bring myself to rename the estate to the State Estate.

What about "Government Estate" or "Central Authority"

 

[Freshplayer]

Civil war need to be actual civil war ike in Anbennar and some other mods, not just stacks of rebels but real countries shattered in two! That would be so much more fun

And then of course the French Revolution need to be a disaster (or situation?) and not just one event asking you what you want to do

I assume the Revolution is more like a situation.

 

[prinscky]

Civil war need to be actual civil war ike in Anbennar and some other mods, not just stacks of rebels but real countries shattered in two! That would be so much more fun

And then of course the French Revolution need to be a disaster (or situation?) and not just one event asking you what you want to do

Totally agree, civil war means a total break up of the previous political structure of a country, there is no "rebel" in a civil war, all parties are competing in the same level and are all sharing some kind of potential legitimacy,
Revolution should be serious threat not just randomly appeared rebels, and often revolution means some of the standing armies turns into the other parties too.

 

[ST_Peter]

So, which historical events do you think would be best represented by a disaster? Post your suggestions here..

There is an opportunity for a very interesting early game disaster for the small Empire of Trebizond, which I know may not be the most played nation but I think it would fit for being a disaster to add some flavor there in Anatolia near the game start, kind of like the Byzantine civil war of 1341-1347 but I think the series of civil wars and instability and usurpations which occurred in the Empire of Trebizond in the period of 1340 - late 1349 fits even more to be a disaster in-game.


First, what happened in history:

So in 1337, it is the Emperor Basil Megas Komnenos who rules the Empire of Trebizond. It is already a period of instability for the Empire, as Basil himself only came to power by deposing and murdering the child-Emperor Manuel II back in 1332. But other than the cruelty towards his nephew, Basil hasn't been a bad Emperor except for one matter, his unfaithfulness. His marriage to the illegitimate daughter of Andronikos III Palaiologos (who ruled the Byzantine Empire in 1337), Irene Palaiologina cooled very quickly, and so Basil took a mistress also named Irene, with whom he would have four illegitimate children. These were his only children, as he had none with Irene Palaiologina

Spurred on by jealousy, Irene Palaiologina would successfully poison her husband in 1340, and would then seize the throne for herself, which sparked the beginning of the civil wars, the civil wars which nearly brought about the end of the Trapezuntine Empire. I won't post all the details about it, which you can find in the links I posted when you research the topic, I will just give a short summary. So at first it was a three-way civil war which lasted many months as none could breach the walls of Trebizond itself, and the Turkomens would take advantage and try their hand at attacking Trebizond, although that came to nothing.

Eventually, Irene's reign would end due to an expected force, her sister-in-law Anna, sister to the late Emperor Basil whom had been in a convent as a nun. She actually escaped from the convent, abandoning her monastic vows, and she got much support for her claim to the throne of Trebizond, and she was proclaimed as such on July 17, 1341, when Irene had abdicated and given up Trebizond without a fight, as her support was all but dead due to multiple factors, the main one to me being that she was not a member of the Megas Komnenos family, and because of the way she ascended to the throne. Yet Irene had one more twist to her story, as she had many months ago sent word to her family in Constantinople to find her a husband to rule Trebizond. Thirteen days after her deposition, July 30th, that man arrived. Michael, the uncle of Basil, came to Trebizond aboard three warships to marry Irene Paloiologina and to become Emperor. At first he was welcomed, and he became Emperor for a day, but that night Michael was imprisoned by the nobility whom supported Anna and he was sent into exile, as was Irene.

Sadly, much of the nobility did not care for Anna either, and still preferred her uncle Michael, whom had been sent into exile by those that supported Anna, so the period of instability continued until just over a year after her reign began, when she was deposed by the nobility of Trebizond and would be murdered on the 3rd of September, and just a day later, September 4, 1342, the son of Michael, John III, would take Trebizond and be proclaimed Emperor.

But yet again the instability continued, as John III proved to be a terrible ruler, weak and dissolute, who did not care at all that his father Michael was still imprisoned by one of the participants in the ongoing civil wars John the Eunuch, and made no efforts at all to have him freed. When John the Eunuch died, Niketas Scholares, one of the men who'd helped John III take the throne, was so frustrated with John III's incompetence that he freed Michael from his captivity. They then took Trebizond, deposed John III, and crowned Michael as Emperor on the 3rd of May, 1344. Michael granted Niketas the title of megas doux and was forced to sign a document which gave Niketas and his ministers almost all power in the Empire, promising to seek their counsel in all official actions. This did not last very long though as the people hated seeing their Emperor stripped of his power, they revolted against this new oligarchy and Michael would use this to imprison Niketas and many more nobles.

Yet the instability only continued under Michael, with the Turks attacking and capturing towns, and the Black Death ravaging Trebizond. Then in 1348 Genoa took Kerasous which was part of a great range of conflicts between the two that was going on around this time. In the end Michael couldn't govern effectively at all and the empire was just falling apart. The crisis would finally be mostly ended when he was deposed by Niketas (who Michael was pressured to release from prison) and installed as Emperor was the son of Basil and his mistress Irene, Alexios III on December 22nd, 1349. He would be born just about a year after the start of the game, in October 1338, and would prove a very capable ruler and a stabilizing Emperor after the previous decades of instability.


So, why do I think this would be a good disaster to have in this upcoming game:


First, it fits with the criteria for a historical disaster, as it is for a specific country, and would no doubt bring a lot of negative effects from it, mostly from being almost perpetually in civil war for a decade, leaving the empire in a precarious state in regards to its neighbors, although this disaster might have a beneficial end state after all is said and done if you are able to get Alexios III in power to maybe end the disaster.

Another reason I think this would be a good disaster is because it is early game, adds flavor to the region, and lasts about a decade, during which there are many changes of ruler, and power struggles between the nobility and the Emperorship which could go different ways in the game than in history depending on who wins. From the period of 1340-1350, there were 6 different Emperors and Empresses of Trebizond, which shows just how unstable the state was at this time, and def meets the requirement imo for a "disaster". There was even almost a sort of constitutional experiment which I described when Michael was in power, although it was the people themselves who brought about its end, so I think this disaster would be a lot of fun to play with in the game, even if it is only for a minor nation.

Anyways, I hope all the links worked nvm you cant post links in here even to relevant articles ;( ... and I would love to see this in the game!

 

[BeyondExpectation]

In the time period, there were numerous instances of polities fragmenting as centralized authority weakened and local forces took control of government functions. To name just a few, Aq Qoyunlu, Bahmanis, Songhai, and the Timurids, while such a process is ongoing in Delhi and the Ilkhanate at game start. The latter can and should have a carefully calibrated internal status with things like debuffs and hostile subjects to simulate that, but in EU4 (along with all other Paradox games) there's very little that can break apart an established empire.

So, to allow polities like Aq Qoyunlu, Bahmanis, Songhai, and the Timurids, I propose a Decentralization and Decay (not a great name) disaster, which can cause countries to have vast swathes break off into vassals, with places distant from the capital, unaccepted cultures and religions, and rough terrain more likely. What would complete this system would be a way for polities with large numbers of vassals have the relationship transform into an international organization, which itself could disolve under certain conditions. Though it might be bad for gameplay, it would probably be historically accurate for the possibility that a minority of those that fall to D&D instantly reach the conditions under which their vassal swarm becomes an IO.

For some reason, European countries in this period didn't seem to suffer from D&D. While Russia and Poland-Lithuania disintegrated, the former somehow reintegrated itself and the latter didn't decentralize at all; it was consumed entirely by large and powerful neighbours. I bring this up because I don't know what conditions should need to be met; obviously long periods of weak and/or rapidly changing rulers would contribute, but I haven't a clue if the lack of D&D in Europe was just coincidence or something different about government style there.